NEW CRITERIA FOR BEING AN INDEPENDENT DIRECTOR IN A VIETNAMESE PUBLIC JOINT STOCK COMPANY

Decree 71/2017 replaced Circular 121/2012 on corporate governance of public join-stock company (Public JSC) since 1 August 2017. Decree 71/2017 does not have its own criteria for being an independent director but refers to the criteria under the Enterprise Law 2014. The table below compares the old criteria of an independent director in a Public JSC with the new criteria under the Enterprise Law 2014. Although in some areas, the Enterprise Law 2014 provides stricter criteria, the Enterprise Law 2014 contains certain major omission (e.g., including omission to exclude managers of an affiliate or representatives or related persons of a major shareholder in a Public JSC from acting as an independent director of a Public JSC).

ISSUES REGARDING APPROVAL PROCEDURES OF A RELATED PARTY TRANSACTION IN A MULTI-MEMBER LLC IN VIETNAM

1.    Where a member (the Conflicted Member) in a limited liability company with two or more members (the LLC) has an interest in a related-party transaction or contract (an RPT) with the Multi-Member LLC, the Enterprise Law 2014 requires the RPT to be approved by the Members’ Council (MC) of the LLC excluding the votes of the Conflicted Member. However, relating to the approval process, the Enterprise Law 2014 is not clear on the following issues:

1.1.    whether the charter capital of the Conflicted Member should be excluded from the calculation of quorum of the MC’s meeting to approve the RPT? and 

1.2.    if the Conflicted Member is the chairman of the MC, whether the Conflicted Member can still preside over the MC’s meeting?

Corporate criminal liability in the context of an M&A transaction in Vietnam

The Penal Code 2015 is silent as to whether corporate criminal liability incurred by one commercial legal person will be succeeded or extinguished if such legal person is liquidated, merged (sáp nhập), consolidated (hợp nhất) or split (chia) and ceases to exist. Under the Civil Code 2015, when a legal person is merged, consolidated or split, only “civil obligations” (nghĩa vụ dân sự) of such legal person are transferred to the relevant new (or succeeding) legal person. As such, criminal liability (trách nhiệm hình sự) of such legal person may not be transferred to the new (or succeeding) legal person. Similarly, under the Enterprise Law 2014, when an enterprise is merged, consolidated or split, only unpaid debts and property obligations (nghĩa vụ tài sản) are transferred to the relevant new (or succeeding) enterprises. It is not clear if criminal liability of the first enterprise could qualify as property obligations which can be transferred to or succeeded by the new (or succeeding) enterprise.

Under the Criminal Proceeding Code 2015, if a legal person, who has been convicted with a crime, undergoes a merger, de-merger, consolidation then the legal person succeeding the rights and obligations of the first mentioned legal person is responsible for performing penalties in form of monetary fine. This provision seems to suggest that not all criminal liabilities will be passed on the succeeding legal person. That said, in a recent seminar on corporate criminal liability, an official of the Ministry of Justice, being a member of the drafting team of the Penal Code 2015, has indicated that he is in favour of the requirement that in the context of the liquidation, merger, consolidation or split of a legal person, a new (or succeeding) legal person must inherit criminal liability of the disappearing entity.

The role of a compliance program in corporate criminal liability in Vietnam

Regarding corporate criminal liability, Vietnamese law does not have specific provisions concerning the role of a corporate compliance program. This means that an effective corporate compliance program cannot be used directly to preclude corporate criminal liability or reduce sentence. This is different from other jurisdictions. That said, a corporate compliance program may still be useful under the Penal Code 2015 for the following reasons:

  • a corporation may refer to the existence of a corporate compliance program as an evidence that the corporation does not instruct, guide or accept a criminal act committed by the relevant individuals within the corporation; and
  • compliance program may be regarded as a mitigating factor under the Penal Code 2015 (e.g., a mean to prevent or mitigate the damages caused by a crime).